Yes, I like OS4, but this doesn┤t mean I don┤t use other alternatives (including AROS 68k). FPGA may in future become real alternative to current PowerPC boards (performance-wise), but certainly not now (far from that).

people want "real hardware" even if emulation is faster and offers more resources. Some even buy very very slow PPC hardware like Sam 440 despite that a PC offers more performance in emulation for less money.

Sure. The are SOME peoples which like real hardware, even if it's underpowered and/or expensive.

But some others like to get the same result, using emulation and a different hardware.

I repeat again the same mantra:

y = f(x)

I don't care about f: only about y, giving a similar x.Quote:

Also when contacting former amiga devs it seemed to me that any virtual platform (how good it might be) is not taken serious.

On the contrary, when PowerPC/OS4 support to WinUAE was added, more peoples, even developers, have been attracted by this new "platform".Quote:

And it is geeky to use the old keyboards with new hardware. The perfect illusion :).

I assume that youi live in real world but you have different illusions... you think a modernized platform has a chance in todays world, I doubt that because of no software and noone interested to develop for it. Also because of no modern development environments starting programming is very hard if you have no prior amiga experience. In the old times with millions of users devs were motivated to do that but we have 2015 now. That is of course also true for a updated 68k platform but at least you have lots of compilers, documentation and includes for it and even beginner languages.

For me Amiga is a retro and fun platform, not more not less. Not for everyday use, not a working horse to replace standard hardware like some do. You are so for a modernized platform so I assume you will develop software for it?

I assume that youi live in real world but you have different illusions...

I have no illusions: I express pragmatical things.Quote:

you think a modernized platform has a chance in todays world,

Sure. For legacy stuff, retrogaming/computing is already working and consolidated. No need to change or waiting for something here.

For non retro, only a modernized platform has some chance.Quote:

I doubt that because of no software and noone interested to develop for it.

AROS, MorphOS and OS4 already proven the contrary.Quote:

Also because of no modern development environments starting programming is very hard if you have no prior amiga experience. In the old times with millions of users devs were motivated to do that but we have 2015 now. That is of course also true for a updated 68k platform but at least you have lots of compilers, documentation and includes for it and even beginner languages.

More modern platforms already have compilers and what's needed for coding. More updated stuff compared to the 68K platform.

And more can come. For example, Microsoft announced some time ago, and released recently, the support for GDB/LLVM MI commands for debugging, starting from Visual Studio 2015. What it means? That a simple GDB server for the target platform can be realized, and then everything else can be easily controlled by VS2015. You can imagine how easier becomes coding and debugging with such very modern development platform.Quote:

For me Amiga is a retro and fun platform, not more not less. Not for everyday use, not a working horse to replace standard hardware like some do.

Well, if it's retro, I don't see any problem, except that it's a "crystallized" platform, with all consequences that it implies.Quote:

You are so for a modernized platform

Sure, if we do NOT talk about retro.

Because for retro I already have the best and cheapest solution: WinUAE.Quote:

so I assume you will develop software for it?

That's a logical fallacy: from the premises you're deducting a completely different thing.

the person only said he might do something. Might do and really do are different beasts

VS 2015 for any of the NG platforms? Wow

if not the comparation makes no sense. The only project I know of where is someone really try to port a modern tool is the guy behind Free Pascal Aros trying to port Lazarus to Aros. That would help a lot. But he is one guy so it needs time. No other projects of this kind I am aware of.

I do not spread nonsense and make such comparations. I compare 68k to "NG" that is Aros X86, AmigaOS and MorphOS and not to Windows or Linux.

What have the NG platforms proven? That they get lots of software. I already mentioned the differences in codebase to you. In some cases the NG versions are a little newer than 68k, in some rare cases there is no 68k version.

I went from MC6800 to MC6809(and HD6309) to MC680XX.LOVED it. What a great ride.Motorola made some great stuff, but you are NEVER going to challenge the performance of a newer ASIC based processor with the FPGA re-implementation of an older CPU.Its not freaking happening (and no, I don't care what GVB has been telling you, its only application is legacy code).

Funny, you guys are still arguing about PPCs, without realizing that they were at one point a very valid direction to go (and for now they still adequately support our NG specifications).

The question is, how does this continue?I think its probably in the creation of a few last PPC boards (motherboards AND plug in cards) and a migration to X64.

This will be sorted out over the next few years, but I challenge anyone to prove me wrong five years from now.

yes.. stuffed somewhere under a huge pile of games i played once since then. but you wouldnt actually expect me to "upgrade", would you? ;)

Quote:

And some components not changed for years. I was surprised to see IconEdit is still 68k application!

actually makes me wonder. afair there was an effort to replace it with a native os4 application, and that effort was even succesful! wasnt that some bounty? and it really isnt included with os4.1fe now? imho, that would be an improvement that actually made some sense, since the original isnt very handy to say the least, and doesnt allow to edit 16 or 24 bit images, which i assume would be rather desirable on non planar systems.

Quote:

With Petunia and RunInUAE, OS4 compatibility is nearly 100 % - with much better performance than 68k...

using uae on whatever system will gain substantially to the compatibility, but it isnt os4 ar ppc exclusive, both will rather lack in comparison because of lower processing power and lack of completed jit, which is still in the work for ppc afair.

What's the problem here? JIT is a very good feature of WinUAE (and I think that there's room for improvements, both for general purpose code and FPU), like the new and bigger caches of the Apollo core.

i have absolutely nothing against jit in uae, and it surely gives you enormous speed gain, supposedly never to be achieved on actual hardware like the fpga systems.

however there are cases when you need to turn jit off, like when mmu needs to be involved or generally while testing and debugging. which is the resaon i run winuae mostly without jit these days. and its why i accidentaly noticed that apollo aibb benchmarks were better.

OS4 developers probably think it is far more convenient to use paint application and change icon settings in icon information window than create new IconEdit.

Quote:

but it isnt os4 ar ppc exclusive

RunInUAE is clever integration of UAE into AmigaOS: eg. I simply copied my WHDLoad installed games directory and all games are playable by usual double-click like on my A1200!

Quote:

and lack of completed jit, which is still in the work afair.

E-UAE PowerPC JIT is already completed and released...

Quote:

so, seems now you are using an explicitely favourable benchmark, right?

As I told Olaf in other thread, never underestimate my subtle mastery of benchmark forging. Doom benchmark is classic application benchmark for performance comparison. I wanted to show performance of Petunia JIT on slow "hardware" in comparison to current FPGA based solution. As AB3D2 doesn┤t work with Petunia and has no simple benchmarking features like Doom, it wouldn┤t be well suited for stated purpose.

OS4 developers probably think it is far more convenient to use paint application and change icon settings in icon information window than create new IconEdit.

so, why was the bounty for in the first place?http://www.amigabounty.net/?function=viewproject&projectid=55and since it seems to be completed, why not include assumably better replacement with the system? i mean in this particular case it isnt really hard to do better than the original, so it is strange that 4.1fe and its predecessor updates which were anyway mostly put together from various contributions do not incorporate this as a notable feature, in order for you to use it in a legitimacy argument.

Quote:

As I told Olaf in other thread, never underestimate my subtle mastery of benchmark forging.

i do never miss your constant reference to that and benchmark forging in general. good to see you confirm to be stiring the pot, as they say.

you need to turn jit off, like when mmu needs to be involved or generally while testing and debugging

I hope there will be someday MMU compliant JIT also for 68k emulation (PowerPC emulation supports MMU).

there will never be mmu and jit emulation at the same time to my knowledge. without jit uae supports mmu, as it is with ppc68k emu, but i doubt there will ever be 68k mmu emulation under jit on a ppc platform. i fear you might not informed yourself or are trying to spread false rumours.

IconEdit was replaced, by the OpenAmiga indicative, but its not in cooperation with Hyperion, so its not part of AmigaOS, you can download the new Icon Editor from OS4Depot.net.

strange in the context of the original amiga os that has been frequently called hack and patch issue by the os4 supporters, that essential components for their system need today to be searched on the net and downloaded separately. some sort of double standard thinking comes to mind.

there will never be mmu and jit emulation at the same time to my knowledge.

Why?

Quote:

or are trying to spread false rumours.

I wrote "I hope", not "there is already".

i cannot explain it specifically, as im not on the technical level, the actual person to ask would be toni. nevertheless since the jit is recompiling the whole machinbe code to a different one in the run time, that it may be impossible to emulate the genuine behaviour of an mmu here. what concerns "hopes" that being quoted few times may turn to facts, i would be very cautious.

on the other hand even apollo has no 68k compliant mmu unit so far. mmu usage is a corner case, however an important one on ocassion.

Last edited by wawa on 06-Dec-2015 at 06:49 PM.Last edited by wawa on 06-Dec-2015 at 06:02 PM.

in the third post under the above link gunnar explains advantages of his cpu in comparison with different previous 68k implementations. we can keep pavlors caveat in mind, this being publicity excercise, and nevertheless everybody can decide for himself if he trust gunnar, or not..;)

Last edited by wawa on 06-Dec-2015 at 06:55 PM.Last edited by wawa on 06-Dec-2015 at 06:54 PM.